About Intellectual Property IP Training Respect for IP IP Outreach IP for… IP and... IP in... Patent & Technology Information Trademark Information Industrial Design Information Geographical Indication Information Plant Variety Information (UPOV) IP Laws, Treaties & Judgements IP Resources IP Reports Patent Protection Trademark Protection Industrial Design Protection Geographical Indication Protection Plant Variety Protection (UPOV) IP Dispute Resolution IP Office Business Solutions Paying for IP Services Negotiation & Decision-Making Development Cooperation Innovation Support Public-Private Partnerships AI Tools & Services The Organization Working with WIPO Accountability Patents Trademarks Industrial Designs Geographical Indications Copyright Trade Secrets WIPO Academy Workshops & Seminars IP Enforcement WIPO ALERT Raising Awareness World IP Day WIPO Magazine Case Studies & Success Stories IP News WIPO Awards Business Universities Indigenous Peoples Judiciaries Genetic Resources, Traditional Knowledge and Traditional Cultural Expressions Economics Gender Equality Global Health Climate Change Competition Policy Sustainable Development Goals Frontier Technologies Mobile Applications Sports Tourism PATENTSCOPE Patent Analytics International Patent Classification ARDI – Research for Innovation ASPI – Specialized Patent Information Global Brand Database Madrid Monitor Article 6ter Express Database Nice Classification Vienna Classification Global Design Database International Designs Bulletin Hague Express Database Locarno Classification Lisbon Express Database Global Brand Database for GIs PLUTO Plant Variety Database GENIE Database WIPO-Administered Treaties WIPO Lex - IP Laws, Treaties & Judgments WIPO Standards IP Statistics WIPO Pearl (Terminology) WIPO Publications Country IP Profiles WIPO Knowledge Center WIPO Technology Trends Global Innovation Index World Intellectual Property Report PCT – The International Patent System ePCT Budapest – The International Microorganism Deposit System Madrid – The International Trademark System eMadrid Article 6ter (armorial bearings, flags, state emblems) Hague – The International Design System eHague Lisbon – The International System of Appellations of Origin and Geographical Indications eLisbon UPOV PRISMA UPOV e-PVP Administration UPOV e-PVP DUS Exchange Mediation Arbitration Expert Determination Domain Name Disputes Centralized Access to Search and Examination (CASE) Digital Access Service (DAS) WIPO Pay Current Account at WIPO WIPO Assemblies Standing Committees Calendar of Meetings WIPO Webcast WIPO Official Documents Development Agenda Technical Assistance IP Training Institutions COVID-19 Support National IP Strategies Policy & Legislative Advice Cooperation Hub Technology and Innovation Support Centers (TISC) Technology Transfer Inventor Assistance Program WIPO GREEN WIPO's Pat-INFORMED Accessible Books Consortium WIPO for Creators WIPO Translate Speech-to-Text Classification Assistant Member States Observers Director General Activities by Unit External Offices Job Vacancies Procurement Results & Budget Financial Reporting Oversight
Arabic English Spanish French Russian Chinese
Laws Treaties Judgments Browse By Jurisdiction

Trinidad and Tobago

TT002-j

Back

CV2016- 03461

The claimant alleged that the Tobago House of Assembly (THA) infringed his neighboring and moral rights in relation to his musical work by broadcasting his song ‘Coal Pot’ in television, radio and YouTube advertisements during October 2012. The claimant submitted that the song was used to promote Tobago’s annual Blue Food Festival without his permission or that of the Copyright Organization of Trinidad and Tobago (COTT). Secondly, the claimant contends that the use of the song in a festival that promotes pork violated his moral rights, as it is contrary to his lifestyle. The promotion also included images of pork which, as argued, was prejudicial to the claimant’s honor and reputation.

The defendant failed to convince the court that the limitation period prohibited the claim from moving forward, as the YouTube advertisements were still accessible up to November 2016. The court also found that the defendant was a proper party to the proceedings. However, as the claimant assigned his neighboring rights to COTT, the court decided that the claimant could not bring an action against the defendant for any alleged infringement of neighboring rights. The claimant may, however, bring an action for alleged violation of his moral rights, as these were not assigned. Due to the claimant’s 2013 performance at the Blue Food Festival, the court found it could not be argued that his lifestyle and reputation were offended by the use of his song to promote the same festival.

Although the claimant was unsuccessful, the court made clear that artists should be properly consulted and remunerated for their creative work.

Cases referred to: No cases were referred to in this judgment.

Other material relied on: Copinger and Skone on Copyright 14th Edition. Pgs. 11-44.